So. Price twice tested 45.4 and pullback. Next level of support 41.6
oil bottoms
- Thread starter billyjoerob
- Start date
So. Price twice tested 45.4 and pullback. Next level of support 41.6
%%
Strange but true, Star k Andrew ;every time i go by XOM,MUR Marathon, Mobile,Royal Dutch Shell [Shell Transport-Shell Trading]
BP, all those oil service-gas stations= they always want to sell.LOL.Every now + then i see a buy -tanker truck fill up.......................................
It was a strong global level. And next level also strong global. Price have to pullback from it with high propability. But you are right. These strong levels price could test several time. Yesterday was a good chance for purchasing. Also from levels of accumulation. You can see them if you choose volume analysis. These levels are clear and understood because volume accumulation on it. It is not prediction of some analytics, not line in your chart, not Fibonacci level not "secret strategy". Just area of accumulation. Exact and visible for all. And you can use it and you can earn . Look at my trade from this level. Precise opening from exact level.
Attachments
it's funny how wrong the experts got the quick bottom in oil (and me too, but I'm not an expert). The poeple on CNBC (Kilduff, Stork, Gartman) were all bearish, Goldman Sachs energy analyst was bearish (lower for longer) and some people on Twitter were all bearish (@energyrosen, who shut down his account after being very wrong). All the banks were predicting lower for longer and $40 oil. One guru who got it right was Dan Dicker, who said that the flattening curve meant that you should load up on oil stocks. There was a Canadian guy who went on CNBC and said "oil to $80" and he got laughed off the set, so that was probably a good sign that oil was going higher. So why were the experts wrong, both on the decline and on the quick bottom? I think the problem is that they were looking at the typical supply and demand that moves oil prices *in the ordinary scenario.* But we are not in an ordinary period, and these periods come along infrequently. The normal indicators don't apply - so looking at supply draws, crack spreads, etc didn't matter. What's been happening recently is that speculators are willing to sit on oil even when it doesn't pay and there is no arbitrage, that's how bullish they are. Of course we may see a double dip, but right now it looks like oil will not go below $40 again. Of course my record on oil is 100% wrong, so oil has probably hit a high.
well I did get one thing right - a break above 10 month meant that bottom was in, that was correct (10 month = 200 day).
This is big mistake to take a decision in trading based on recommendation of other people's. Especially if these peoples are not traders but journalists.
%%
Good points Andrew; even though a range of targets like MODERN TRADER mag of 2016 = $27 -$83+/ may be some help LOL. Thier mode [most common price was $50,, 14 analysts WTI, i think] I got a good laugh the way WSJ journalists puts a 65 day moving average on thier charts, as if that means something. It may.; but thats too far from 50 dma LOL
And I don't understand: are they really wrong with predictions or do it deliberately to deceive the common people
http://www.cnbc.com/id/46877251 - this an axample a prediction.
Wednesday, 28 Mar 2012 | 7:06 AM ET - Gold Price ‘Too Low’: Goldman Sachs - The analysts forecast that gold will rise to $1,785 per ounce over the next 3 months, $1,840 over the next 6, and $1,940 over the next year.
If you remember Gold failed till 1000 USD after it.
Wednesday, 28 Mar 2012 | 7:06 AM ET - Gold Price ‘Too Low’: Goldman Sachs - The analysts forecast that gold will rise to $1,785 per ounce over the next 3 months, $1,840 over the next 6, and $1,940 over the next year.
If you remember Gold failed till 1000 USD after it.